Remember my post about. motivation. ? . I found his speech on the effectiveness of tangible and intangible ways. On the evidence. For examples of. I really liked it, so I quote. In fact, traditional management has outlived its. Neither the matrix nor functional, nor any other structures, except for the network, no longer work. Submission does not work. Leadership is still holding. We will soon be forced to invent new management - the creation of self-organized groups and the motivation of the desired result. Something like that. In general, read the original message or just look at the presentation. here. :.
So, gentlemen of the jury, look here. This is called ... Some may already be familiar with it. It came up in 1945 by psychologist Karl Duncker. Karl Duncker conceived experiment, which in various forms currently used in behavioral science. Here's how it works. Let me - the experimenter. You looking for some in the room and give you a candle, a box with buttons and matches. Your task - to attach the candle to the wall so that the wax does not drip on the table. Your actions?.
Some begin with an attempt to attach the candle to the wall of the buttons. Can not. More... see, I see, I'm here to place someone shows signs... Others believe that the best way to light a candle to melt the tip and glue it to the wall. The idea of a grand, but it does not work.... Ultimately, the minutes of commercials after 5-10, most participants find the solution you see here. The key point - to overcome t. n. functional fixation. You are looking at a box and see a container for buttons. But it may have a different function, such as a platform for candles. Here it is - ...
Now I will tell you about an experiment based on the ... which is now at Princeton, USA. Experiments on strength of incentives. Here's the gist. Glaksberg stated experimental conditions: ...
The second group, he offered a reward, saying: ... And the best result of the day be rewarded 20- dollars. ... The amount of decent, a couple of minutes of work. It is a good incentive.
Q: How much faster the second group solved the problem? . Again: More on 3.5 minutes. But it should not be! . And so he should not be working, right? . Give them an incentive only. Since the business operates. But something was not working. There is an incentive designed to exacerbate and accelerate creative thinking. But he acts just the opposite. Dulls thinking, interferes with creativity.
And what is most interesting: the experiment - there is not a deviation from the norms. He repeated over and over again for almost 40 years. Conditioned stimulus, ... But for many kinds of work, they either do not work, or, sometimes, just hurt. This discovery - one of the most grounded in social science. And also - one of the most neglected.
In the past few years, I became interested in the science of human motivation, especially the dynamics of external stimuli and internal stimuli. I'll tell you what their impact is quite different. The situation is that there is a gap between what science knows and what business practices. Particularly disturbing is that our system is functioning business - I mean a set of assumptions and agreements that underpin the business, namely, the system of motivation and human resource management - all of it is based on external stimuli is based on a system of carrots and sticks. In fact, it is quite normal for a typical work of the 20th century. But for a typical work of the 21st century, the mechanistic approach of carrots and sticks are not suitable, often does not work, and often opposing. Clarify what I mean.
Sam did Glaksberg version of the same experiment, in which he gave the same puzzle in a different way. like this. I hope you understand? . ... One: we will measure the rate for. Another: we give you incentives. What happened this time? . Why not? .
Stimulus ... ... The award, by their very nature, narrows our focus, concentrating brain. That is why it is effective in many cases. Therefore, for this kind of job, when a narrow focus on a specific goal leads us right to it, works very well rewarded. But the solution to this ... The solution is not obvious. It overseas the field of view. And you have to look around. And here is the reward, in fact, narrows our focus and limit our ability to.
Clarify why it is so important. In Western Europe, in many parts of Asia, North America and Australia, ... Installed and adjusted jobs left hemisphere of the work on accounting and financial analysis, some programming tasks, it was pretty easy to delegate to other countries, it became easy to automate. The computer will make you a faster. Suppliers from countries with low wages make it cheaper to you. Become much more important jobs of the right hemisphere, which laid the capacity for creativity and abstraction.
Think about your own work. Think about your work. Are the problems that you need to solve, or even those that we touch here the problem of this kind - unless they are based on clear rules and have a unique solution? . Rules are surrounded by mystery. The decision, if any, is surprising and not obvious. Everyone who sits in this room, decides its own version of ... So for the mysteries of the candles of any kind, from any area of remuneration such as ... e. the basis upon which the management of many firms simply do not work.
I was furious when I think about it. And it's not... - here's the thing! . Do you understand? . This - not philosophy. I - an American, and I reject the philosophy of. This is - nothing, as a fact. Or, as they say in my native Washington, this - true fact. (Laughter ) (Applause) I'll try to explain their thoughts on the example. Enter into the hall of my witnesses. After all, I will not tell stories. I gave a speech at the trial.
Gentlemen of the jury, the word witness, Dan Ariely, one of the great economists of our time. He and his three colleagues from MIT, had a follow-up study. They gave a bunch of MIT students to play. In some games require creativity, any movement or concentration. Students know that as a result of productivity they are waiting for three levels of remuneration. Small, medium, large. I think, is clear: when you get a great big success of the award, and further down... What happened? . While it is clear. But as soon as the task implied the presence of the most basic mental effort, a larger premium led to a decrease in productivity.
Then, the authors thought experiment: ... ... Conditions are the same: a series of games, three levels of awards. What are the results there? . But this time, the greatest reward led to the worst performance. In 8 out of 9 jobs on each of 3 experiments resulted in an increase in premiums for poor performance.
I do not do this if its subversion rabid supporters of communism? . This case led economists from private universities: MIT, Carnegie - Mellon, Chicago. And you know who sponsored the study? . This is - the American experience.
Well, let's take a look across the ocean to the famous LSE, London School of Economics. 11 Cradle of future Nobel laureates in economics. From it grew the economy idols: George Soros, Friedrich Hayek, and more and Mick Jagger. ( idol worshipers Rolling Stones) ( Laughter ) Do not continue as last month, economists from LSE have reviewed the 51 companies that pay employees only for the performance. This is what economists write LSE: « We have come to the conclusion that financial incentives can affect the overall productivity. ...
There is a gap between what science knows, and that the practice of. I anxiously watch the dam in the middle of the economic crisis as a huge number of organizations make decisions on managing their valuable human resources on the basis of outdated and untested assumptions based more on ... But to exit the current economic troubles, to achieve high efficiency in solving typical 21st-century problems, run faster in the wrong direction - not the solution. To attract more sweet carrot - not a solution, a longer threaten the whip - not a solution. We urgently need a completely new approach.
Fortunately, the scientific study of motivation. provides just such a new approach. This is - an approach based more on internal motivation. In an effort to create something meaningful, because it's like because it's interesting, because it is a part of something more important. I personally think that the new system for the operation of our companies should be based on three principles: independence, professionalism and focus. Autonomy - the need for himself to direct their lives. Professionalism - the desire to get better and better in the important case. Mainstreaming - the desire to do their job for the sake of something greater than yourself. That is - the cornerstones of an entirely new system of functioning of our companies.
Today I will address only the independence. In the 20th century, the idea of managing people, t. n. management. So, the management - not the creation of nature. Management - this is... in short, it is - not the starry sky. This is - as a radio. Clearly, I put it? . And nobody said that it will work forever. Management - this is fine. Its traditional ideas are perfect if you want to diligence. But when you want to participate, the result gives a much better self-regulation.
I'll give you a couple examples of the fundamental interpretation of self-. What's the idea? . The idea is that first, the salary should be adequate and fair, this is without a doubt. This is a question of money withdrawn from the agenda. And then the employee provide a large share of independence. Referring to the practice of.
Has anyone heard of the company Atlassian? . Atlassian - is an Australian software company. And they're doing something incredibly cool. Several times a year, they tell their engineers: ... Work on what your heart desires. ... Then each child presents his colleagues and other staff in the noisy and uncontrolled general meeting, at the end of the day. And then, as is customary in Australia, all drinking beer.
They call it a Days Fedex Express Mail. Why not? . This is an original. And it's not bad, although there was a gross violation of trademark rights. But it's damn clever. (Laughter.) That day, enhanced autonomy helps create a range of software solutions, which could never be.
The method has been so productive that Atlassian raised it to the next level, the level of ... It's - the famous system of work at Google. The engineers at Google can spend 20 % of the time to do any work to your liking. They are independent in the choice of time, in the choice of tasks, teams, equipment. Do you understand? . And how many of you know, a Google every year, about half of the new product is born during those ... Products such as: Gmail, Orkut, Google News.
Here is an even more radical example of the same ideas. It's called ... Short for: ROWE. The system was developed by two American advisors to about ten companies across North America. With ROWE, employees do not have to work out the schedule. They appear to work when they want. No specific time in office, can never come. It is only necessary to do the job. How to do when to do, where to do - it's everyone decides for himself. Appointments and meetings in these conditions - only on request.
And the result? . Independence, professionalism and focus - these pillars have to build new conditions of productive activity. You probably say, ... It is tempting, but the utopian. ... bring evidence. ...
Mid- 90s, Microsoft began a project electronic encyclopedia Encarta. Were involved in all the right incentives. All right incentives. Professionals paid for writing and editing articles. Process led by well-paid managers, keeping within budget and time. And then, after a couple of years, there is another encyclopedia. On a completely different model, as we know. Do have fun! . Create! .
Let's assume that some 10 years ago you would have appealed to economists in any country, and said: ... Here you have two different models to create encyclopedia. If they have to face their foreheads, who would win? ...
It was a struggle of titans, a struggle between two different approaches. It was a battle of the century in the arena of motivation, like the fight for the title of world champion in boxing super- heavyweight. In front of everyone! . Independence, professionalism and focus against the carrot and stick. And who won? . I round off.
There is a gap between scientific knowledge and business practices. What is known to science? . Second, the rewards of the ... Third, the secret to high productivity is not in the system of rewarding and punishing, but in the invisible inner engine. Desire to create things for themselves. Desire to do something, because it is important.
Here's the most important. That is - the best. Frankly, we already knew. Science confirms what we chuem heart. I finished my speech.
No comments:
Post a Comment